Diana McCaulay, Contributor
IN RECENT news reports in both newspapers, Conservator of Forests Marilyn Headley conceded that Jamaica has a "serious" deforestation problem, but took issue with the frequently-quoted statistic that Jamaica has the highest rate of deforestation in the world.
Both press reports I saw were spectacularly short of facts, so I decided to speak to the conservator of forests myself.
I was impressed that Miss Headley was not only prepared to speak to me at short notice - in general it is impossible to get information from civil servants when you are on deadline - but she did so at length and with some frankness.
With regard to Jamaica's rate of deforestation, Miss Headley says the Forestry Department's own figures indicate a rate of deforestation of 0.1 per cent between 1989 and 1998 for the entire island. Being an average, she said, this figure masks areas where the rate of deforestation is much higher. We tossed around the various figures generated by the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Resources Institute (WRI) for a while, but eventually agreed that past rates of deforestation are not the issue. What we need to know now is how deforested we are now.
The Draft National Forest Management and Conservation Plan estimates just over 30 per cent of the island is still in forest, but only eight per cent of this is primary or undisturbed forest.
"So what's the Forestry Department's position on primary forests?" I asked.
"They should be conserved," Miss Headley said. "The problem is that not all primary forests are in reserves."
According to the Forest Management Plan, more than 64 per cent of the forested areas, including primary forest, are currently unprotected. Even in protected areas or reserves, more than one-third of forests have already been significantly disturbed.
"If primary forests should be conserved, what's the Forestry Department's position on the Long Mountain housing development?" I asked.
"Good question," Miss Headley answered.
There was a bit of a silence and some muffled consultation.
"I don't think Long Mountain is one of our forest reserves," she said.
"But if it's primary forest it should be conserved regardless," I prompted.
"Primary forest should be conserved," repeated Miss Headley, refusing to be drawn further.
"What about the mining lease in the Cockpit Country?" I asked. "The Cockpit Country has a good chunk of the primary forest."
Miss Headley said preliminary discussions had been held with the Jamaica Bauxite Institute, but the Forestry Department still had no specific information as to where bauxite was located and where mining might or might not be contemplated.
"Their mining law supercedes ours," she went on, "they only have to tell us when they are going to mine, but we can't stop them."
Inroads
Some of the worst areas of deforestation are associated with bauxite mines, not entirely with the mines themselves, although it is clear that mines and trees are mutually exclusive, but with the access roads.
"So what's the Forestry Department's position on roads?" I asked, remembering a comment by a United States forestry official who described the three most serious problems facing forests as "roads, roads and roads."
"I don't think we have a policy on roads per se," Miss Headley said, "but there's no doubt roads have facilitated deforestation."
A new Forestry Act was passed in 1996 and the promulgation of regulations is still awaited. These were said to be imminent. I asked whether the regulations would make provision for the licensing of chain saws and sawmills. Miss Headley advised that regrettably she could not release the content of the regulations as they were not "a public document."
"What happens if they're passed and the public considers them entirely inadequate?"
"Well, I've been told that's the legal position," said Miss Headley. "I can't tell you what's in the regulations until they're promulgated."
So much for transparency and public participation, I thought.
The new Forestry Act allows fines between $100,000 and $500,000 and a prison term between one and two years for illegal logging.
"When are we going to see this actually enforced?" I asked.
The draft Forestry Plan itself identifies "a lack of demonstrated commitment and accountability by senior levels of government to the enforcement of environmental laws, policies and plans".
"We've had a few cases," said Miss Headley, "but the fines levied have been low."
"When is this Draft Management Plan going to become An Actual Forestry Management Plan?" I asked, tongue in cheek, thinking of the last Forestry Action Plan, gathering dust on my shelves.
"It's going to the printers shortly," said Miss Headley.
She was enthusiastic about certain provisions of the new plan, such as the establishment of a forestry fund and a private lands tree planting programme. She estimated the fund would be "up and running" this year. I expressed scepticism, but would be delighted to be proved wrong.
At the end of the discussion, I felt the Forestry Department did have a new level of commitment to the task of forest conservation and reafforestation. However, I remain disturbed by the depredations of other agencies of Government and the priority that is given to houses and mines at the expense of forests.
I look forward to having a conservator of forests who will publicly take strong positions against development in watershed and primary forest areas, since it appears we cannot reply on the Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA) to stay with me here - actually conserve natural resources. (Hey, you think that's why the NRCA changed its name?)
Readers can e-mail Diana McCaulay at dmcaulay@u.washington.edu
